MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Neutron diffraction measurements of residual stresses around a crack tip developed under variable‐amplitude fatigue loadings

2010· article· en· W1840881278 on OpenAlexaff
S. Y. Lee, R. B. Rogge, Hahn Choo, Peter K. Liaw

Bibliographic record

VenueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & Structures · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicFatigue and fracture mechanics
Canadian institutionsNational Research Council Canada
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchNational Science Foundation
KeywordsResidual stressMaterials scienceCrack closureAmplitudeNeutron diffractionStructural engineeringScanning electron microscopeDiffractionCrack tip opening displacementComposite materialTension (geology)ResidualCompact tension specimenFracture mechanicsStress concentrationStress intensity factorTransverse planeCrack growth resistance curveOpticsUltimate tensile strengthMathematicsPhysicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT The spatially resolved neutron‐diffraction residual stress mappings were performed on five compact‐tension (CT) specimens subjected to various variable‐amplitude fatigue loadings (e.g. overload, underload and their mixed loads) during fatigue crack propagation. Three principal residual‐stress components (i.e. longitudinal, transverse and normal stresses) were measured as a function of the distance from the crack tip along the crack‐propagation direction. The shape of respective crack tips on the five CT specimens was examined using scanning electron microscope. The results show the distinct residual‐stress fields near the crack tip and significant changes in the crack‐tip geometry for five different loading cases. It is thought that the combined effects of the changes in the residual‐stress state and crack‐tip geometry seem to be a key factor to account for the observed transient crack‐growth phenomena.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFatigue & Fracture of Engineering Materials & StructuresSame topicFatigue and fracture mechanicsFrench-language works237,207